3 ms·

Because it may be viewed as an anti-competitive business practice intended to prevent customers from switching providers. Yes, AWS’s customers knew what they w

Because it may be viewed as an anti-competitive business practice intended to prevent customers from switching providers. Yes, AWS’s customers knew what they were signing up for, but AWS’s competitors and potential competitors have a right to enter the market and compete with AWS, and they can’t do that effectively if AWS is hoarding all the customers with punitive switching fees.

cyberax 3y ago
> Because it may be viewed as an anti-competitive business practice intended to prevent customers from switching providers. S3 egress rates do not prevent you from switching. Transferring out data costs about the same as 3 months of regular storage. > AWS is hoarding all the customers with punitive switching fees. The fees are not punitive. The Internet egress fees are similar to inter-region transfer fees within AWS itself.
- sitkack 3y ago
  Sounds like a libertarian trope. Their house, their rules. AWS and all the clouds are too big. They structure prices to milk the most of their captured customers. They all price their products within parity, so on the whole there isn't a huge difference in moving. This also makes a nice natural churn between them. The clouds themselves offer almost no innovation in the computing space. You know who the real rubes are? Everyone else, chip manufacturers, storage, etc. They all made commodity things using shared protocols and people are just pissing it away. And this sht replacing everything is worse than the stuff getting recycled, hardware, ideas, all of it.
  - cyberax 3y ago
    > Sounds like a libertarian trope. Their house, their rules. Well, yes. I support regulation when it makes sense, but this situation isn't it. > They structure prices to milk the most of their captured customers. They all price their products within parity, so on the whole there isn't a huge difference in moving. You've got to make your money somehow. And expense structures for various large providers are pretty similar, there's no shady conspiracy here.
  - immibis 3y ago
    You asked why it isn't against the law, and the law about these things is libertarian. The law says that since the fee was clearly communicated to you and you had a choice to use the service or not, there's nothing wrong with that.

cyberax 3y ago

> Because it may be viewed as an anti-competitive business practice intended to prevent customers from switching providers. S3 egress rates do not prevent you from switching. Transferring out data costs about the same as 3 months of regular storage. > AWS is hoarding all the customers with punitive switching fees. The fees are not punitive. The Internet egress fees are similar to inter-region transfer fees within AWS itself.

sitkack 3y ago
Sounds like a libertarian trope. Their house, their rules. AWS and all the clouds are too big. They structure prices to milk the most of their captured customers. They all price their products within parity, so on the whole there isn't a huge difference in moving. This also makes a nice natural churn between them. The clouds themselves offer almost no innovation in the computing space. You know who the real rubes are? Everyone else, chip manufacturers, storage, etc. They all made commodity things using shared protocols and people are just pissing it away. And this sht replacing everything is worse than the stuff getting recycled, hardware, ideas, all of it.
- cyberax 3y ago
  > Sounds like a libertarian trope. Their house, their rules. Well, yes. I support regulation when it makes sense, but this situation isn't it. > They structure prices to milk the most of their captured customers. They all price their products within parity, so on the whole there isn't a huge difference in moving. You've got to make your money somehow. And expense structures for various large providers are pretty similar, there's no shady conspiracy here.
- immibis 3y ago
  You asked why it isn't against the law, and the law about these things is libertarian. The law says that since the fee was clearly communicated to you and you had a choice to use the service or not, there's nothing wrong with that.